Heard plenty about him being a destroyer of spin but scared of pace! Was weak against short ball, and even Hayden commented on him.

But his average of 65 in England does say that he isn't that hopeless against pace. So what is the fact?

01-02-2012, 11:24 AM

Prince EWS

England really isn't the truest test of a batsman against pace as such; it's the ultimate test of a batsman's ability against the ball moving in the air. There's a lot more pace and bounce in Australian and South African pitches (and bowlers at the time, for that matter).

But yeah look Ganguly was technically weak against the short ball - very much so early in his career - and it became something that was regularly targeted. It was the stock standard plan to him whenever he played so he got out like that a fair bit but he forged a good career in spite of that (even away from home to an extent as you pointed out) because (a bit like Gambhir in South Africa I guess, but well, better) he learned to cop a few body shots when he wasn't able to get out of the way and stopped trying to defend throat balls with the bat.

He certainly was not as bad as say Raina is at the moment but it was a weakness.

01-02-2012, 10:00 PM

weldone

He was a great player of spin, a fine player of swing, and a bad player of pace and bounce (by International standards) - but as PEWS pointed out, not as bad as Raina there too. And he overcame that weakness to an extent through grit and determination.

01-02-2012, 10:36 PM

Jono

He was vulnerable to bounce. Skiddy bowlers, even those very fast, did not bother him that much.